(PhysOrg.com) -- Bumblebees can find the solution to a complex mathematical problem which keeps computers busy for days.
Scientists at Queen Mary, University of London and Royal Holloway, University of London have discovered that bees learn to fly the shortest possible route between flowers even if they discover the flowers in a different order. Bees are effectively solving the 'Travelling Salesman Problem', and these are the first animals found to do this.

The Travelling Salesman must find the shortest route that allows him to visit all locations on his route. Computers solve it by comparing the length of all possible routes and choosing the shortest. However, bees solve it without computer assistance using a brain the size of grass seed.

Professor Lars Chittka from Queen Mary's School of Biological and Chemical Sciences said: "In nature, bees have to link hundreds of flowers in a way that minimises travel distance, and then reliably find their way home - not a trivial feat if you have a brain the size of a pinhead! Indeed such travelling salesmen problems keep supercomputers busy for days. Studying how bee brains solve such challenging tasks might allow us to identify the minimal neural circuitry required for complex problem solving."

The team used computer controlled artificial flowers to test whether bees would follow a route defined by the order in which they discovered the flowers or if they would find the shortest route. After exploring the location of the flowers, bees quickly learned to fly the shortest route.

As well as enhancing our understanding of how bees move around the landscape pollinating crops and wild flowers, this research, which is due to be published in The American Naturalist this week, has other applications. Our lifestyle relies on networks such as traffic on the roads, information flow on the web and business supply chains. By understanding how bees can solve their problem with such a tiny brain we can improve our management of these everyday networks without needing lots of computer time.

Co-author and Queen Mary colleague, Dr. Mathieu Lihoreau adds: "There is a common perception that smaller brains constrain animals to be simple reflex machines. But our work with bees shows advanced cognitive capacities with very limited neuron numbers. There is an urgent need to understand the neuronal hardware underpinning animal intelligence, and relatively simple nervous systems such as those of insects make this mystery more tractable."

So you will now think. What has this to do with religion? The Quran highlights this fact of the abiliity of the bee in the Quran 1400 years ago. One of the many scientific miracles of the Quran. Here is the verse:

"And your Lord taught the honey bee to build its cells in hills, on trees, and in (men's) habitations; Then to eat of all the produce (of the earth), and find with skill the spacious paths of its Lord... verily in this is a Sign for those who give thought. (Surat an-Nahl (The Chapter of The Bee), Quran 16:68-69)

A tiny information in the Quran that seems irrelevant for 1400 years becomes suddenly scientific news. But how could Muhammad (peace be upon him) know of this? Did he conduct experiments with artificial flowers? Did he had others scriptures at had that he copied? Or was it that the inspiration for the Quran came from the Creator, who created the bee and everything that is in this world? I leave this to you to answer but the relation to this news and the Quran verse are definitly there.

As always, peace

PS: Gotterdammerung, how are you doing? Are you still on the right path? I hope you read this and know that i havent forgotten you and our discussions here.

These are signs of the All-Mighty, showing us His existance by proof of knowledge that only the Creator could have considering the Quran was revealed 1400 years ago.

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)

Since bee-keeping started at least 3100 years before the Quran was written, it doesn't seem quite so magical that someone might have noticed that bees are good at gathering efficently.

But looking at the quote it shows a lot of ignorance: "Then to eat of all the produce (of the earth), and find with skill the spacious paths of its Lord... "

where as we all know bees don't eat all the produce of the earth, in fact they eat a very, very, very small subsection of the earths produce. Is the translation wrong or was the Angel wrong when he spoke of it ?

This is what every PvP argument boils down to:
Dear Devs:
Rock is overpowered, please nerf. Paper is fine.
Yours, Scissors

But the Quran is the word of Allah revealed to Muhammad, peace be upon him. He is known to be a desert dweller and i fail to see how he could have ever contemplated on the flight patterns of a bee.

If the Muhammad was located in the Alps in the meadow full of flowers and the bees swirling busily collecting nectar, yes ... but not while sitting on a sand dune in Arabia.

Grashnak i looked into your point and found out there are over 20.000 known species of bees and are a major factor of pollination in our ecosystem. They get their nectar from many different kinds of plants.

Celtic22, your statement is all fine. Now create more such statements. If you care for a challenge. How about producing 10 verses in the style of the Quran? Sounds like fun right? Tell me if you are up to it.

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)

If the Muhammad was located in the Alps in the meadow full of flowers and the bees swirling busily collecting nectar, yes ... but not while sitting on a sand dune in Arabia.

Would he be near a blacksmith there too ? No ? Would he know that iron is hammered on a forge ?
Would he be near a sheep farm ? No ? Would he know where wool comes from ?
Would he be near a wheat farm ? No ? Would he know what bread is made from ?

I don't think that argument holds water.

Quote:

Grashnak i looked into your point and found out there are over 20.000 known species of bees and are a major factor of pollination in our ecosystem. They get their nectar from many different kinds of plants.

That is not 'Then to eat of all the produce (of the earth)' though is it ? I mean nectar is but a single produce isn't it ? It's like saying because I eat sausages of all the species of pigs in the world I 'eat of all the produce (of the earth)' which is clearly wrong. It is but a tiny sub-section of all the produce.

This is what every PvP argument boils down to:
Dear Devs:
Rock is overpowered, please nerf. Paper is fine.
Yours, Scissors

My argument is as good as your actually. Btw. a month ago coincidentally I saw a bee collecting nectar. Since i know the Quran talks of bees and every living being is a sign for us of Allah i watched attentively. But in all honesty, i thought the bee was being rather clumbsy in its work. The bee was buzzing around, moving left right then pausing in the air, just to land on a flower. It seems so random but who would have thought that they are highly efficient in their work. You have to observe them yourself. Ill search or a yt video and post if I find one showing bees in duty.

One would have to look at the arabic original text but since i have no expertise in it cannot answer your question Grashnak. Until i get not better information i stand with my explanation.

Ok, Saint Sinner fantastic, open a new thread at your will. You are to produce10 verses. Topic is "Me God". You pretend to be God and write 10 verses to your creation. Post 10 verses and at the end I will post 10 verses of the Quran to compare which sounds better just for the fun of it. There is no winning or losing. Just an attempt at re-creating the Quran which you non-Muslims say is a product of a man and not of Allah.

One condition is your verses must be scientifically and logically sound and prophecies are allowed.

You are so gonna fail

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)

How do you distort that into 'bees find with skill the shortest route'? It doesn't say that at all: it says that the bee follows the '... paths of it's Lord'.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.

In a three dimensional space a bee is able to calculate the shortest possible path.

The Quranic verse talks about bees mentions that they have an abillity, that is they find with skill the "spacious paths of its Lord". Spacious undoubtly means a three dimensional space. The skill is their ability to calculate their path efficiently.

Now i present you with a common mistake that many former christians now atheists have. They assume all religion to be bogus. And they assume science is contradictory to religion. Religion never of mostly never contributes to science.

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)

In a three dimensional space a bee is able to calculate the shortest possible path.

Your quote says the bees find the "spacious paths of its Lord". Following someones else's path as your Q'ran quote says, and calculating your own path as science says, are not the same thing.

Quote:

They assume all religion to be bogus.

That "assumption" is based on the complete lack of any evidence at all that any god exists.

Quote:

But that is not the case with Islam as this video will prove.

All that video proves is how incredibly gullible you are. Clearly, you will believe any old crap as long as it props up your concept of Islamic exceptionalism, and have no critical thinking skills at all.

I can't be bothered taking apart every lie in that short video, the three most blatant lies are sufficient.

1) Muslims did not invent algebra as your video says. The 'Father of Algebra' was Diophantus who worked it all out centuries before Islam ever existed and around 480 years before Khwarizmi was born. The origins of algebra go way back to the Babylonians, and was known to Indians before Christ was born, specifically the Jainist mathematicians.

If you were half as smart as you pretend to be, you would have noted that the word 'algebra' comes from 'al-jabr' which means 'restoration'. It is called 'restoration' because Khwarizmi was 'restoring' a branch of mathematics he had learned from Indians, in his famous book 'On the Calculation with Hindu Numerals'...

2) Muslims did not invent tigonometry as your video says. Trigonometry can be traced all the way back to Mesopotamians around 2000BC; Indians had it 800BC and wrote it down in the Sulba Sutras; the Greek Hipparchus had trig tables 150BC; Aryabhata had sine and cosine tables 100 years before Mohammed was born.

3) Muslims did not invent the decimal fraction as your video says. The decimal Brahmi Numerals (that the so-called Arabic numerals are based on) were around at least 400 years BC - 1200 years before the Muslims you imagine invented it - and used a positional system described in the Edicts of Ashoka in 300BC. A more advanced decimal system using the concept of numeral zero is described in the Bakhshali Manuscript around 400AD.

As for your videos nonsensical claim that Islam invented the first calculating machine - ever heard of that thing called an 'abacus' that the ancient Egyptians were using 2000BC?

Still... I suppose if you are gullible enough to believe that the Q'ran has no contradictions, I should expect you to believe Islamic lies like these.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.

Your quote says the bees find the "spacious paths of its Lord". Following someones else's path as your Q'ran quote says, and calculating your own path as science says, are not the same thing.

Everything belongs to God...

Quote:

That "assumption" is based on the complete lack of any evidence at all that any god exists.

Talking to atheists i have come to understand that there is no such thing as evidence for them due to their relativistic nature of thinking. Goedel i believe said more or less that there is no system that works without assumptions when people like Wittgenstein (Vienna circle) wanted to create a 'objective' language. Everything is based on faith.. or assumptions.

Other than that, VoR thanks for pointing out the origins of some of the mathematical inventions. Credit where credit is due.

The claim that the video makes is that the need for algebra and the other branches of mathematics, astronomy, etc. was based on the need to fulfil religious obligations.

Like astronomy, if you are commanded by Allah to pray five times a day in the direction of Makkah, its not a problem if you live in the vincity of Makkah. Its a problem if you live in Syria or Egypt because knowing the direction becomes a guess. But with mathematical calculations it the prayer direction can be calculated exactly.

So the commandments of the Quran led the Muslims to seek knowledge, collect it and use it.

It may be wrong to say the Muslims invented it, i dont know, some people say Muslims didnt invent anything, others argue, they did not invent those things but improved them greatly.

In the same light a person can say Europe did not invent anything new. They took their knowledge from the Muslims which took it from the Greeks, Romans and Indians. Or one can say Europe developed the sciences further. Im fine with such a narrative. No need to hate, everyone has a right to be proud for his or his peoples achivement to humanity.

btw. did you read all those books you are refering to? Or did you look up at wiki? You make it sound like you have a high general knowledge of things.

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)

Talking to atheists i have come to understand that there is no such thing as evidence for them due to their relativistic nature of thinking.

Try using 'rational' instead of 'relativistic', then you would make more sense. deciding whether God exists or not has absolutely nothing to do with relativism, and everything to do with epistemology. If you want to me to believe in your God, then show me where your knowledge of any gods existence comes from.

So far, on that basis, reasons to believe in God are zero, and reasons to doubt any god exists are approaching infinity.

Quote:

In the same light a person can say Europe did not invent anything new. They took their knowledge from the Muslims which took it from the Greeks, Romans and Indians.

Which Muslim did Copernicus get his knowledge from? Or Newton? Or Mendeleev? Or Pasteur? Or the Curries?

Renaissance Europe was interested in the classic Greeks and Romans. They didn't have any interest in Islam at all, apart from driving it out of Europe and North Africa. Any transfer of knowledge was minimal.

Seriously, if Europeans want information about Italy or Greece - which are both in Europe - why would they go through Islam to get it when they can just go to Greece or Rome? Your fantasies make no sense.

Quote:

did you read all those books you are refering to?

I read books about those books, and translations of the relevant passages. They appear on my radar from a linguistic perspective (my MA is Literary Linguistics) as examples of the Middle Indo-Aryan prakrits. The 'general' knowledge as you describe it is, for me, contextual secondary knowledge. To understand literature or language, you have to understand the culture that produces it. Specifically, Vedic Sanskrit (Old Indo-Aryan) is the earliest known language with a codified grammar, which seems to suggest a culture with a drive to seek order in the universe.

Quote:

You make it sound like you have a high general knowledge of things.

Difficult to say. I chose to study literature and language largely because of the secondary knowledge required. For me, the culture, social conditions, politics, economy, etc. behind any text is as interesting as the text itself. Whether that can be regarded as general knowledge I couldn't really say. I could, for example, hold forth on the evolution of English rape law from the 17th century to present. I imagine it would sound like high general knowledge, but in reality it comes from studying Aphra Benn's 'The Rover', which features a heroine who narrowly escapes rape twice without the potential rapist being portrayed as a villain in either scene. Why would that be? 17th century rape law has the answer.

Ask me about what was going on in China at that time and I wouldn't have a clue, but neither would I get involved in a conversation on the topic...

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.

You are being euro centric here. According to you Muslims took their ideas from former civilisations while Europe's development of science had only minimal recourse to arabic knowledge ('minimal knowledge transfer'). Your undermine your assumption with a hypothetical statement clothted in a question.

I call that euro centric in my books. I dont know which books Isaac Newton read but perhaps he (and other european scientists) had some translations of arabic scientists which i assume. There were translations of arabic works in circulation. Fact.

Books on medicine are well known to have been used by the europeans up until the 18th century.

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)

I dont know which books Isaac Newton read but perhaps he (and other european scientists) had some translations of arabic scientists which i assume.

Why don't you find out instead of assuming? As a child, Newton had the standard classical education of the time, which involved learning Latin and Greek, and studying Latin and Greek texts. The fashion of the time was for scientific papers to be written in Latin, as Newton did. Principia Mathematica and Opticks where both in Latin. He did not learn Arabic, or study Muslim texts.

He went to Trinity College Cambridge, where the curriculum was based on studying Aristotle - who was not a Muslim. Newton also studied the other great European thinkers of the time, such Descartes, Galileo, Copernicus, and Kepler. Notice how none of those are Muslim.

Quote:

According to you Muslims took their ideas from former civilisations while Europe's development of science had only minimal recourse to arabic knowledge ('minimal knowledge transfer').

Islam got it's knowledge from Greeks and Romans, and so did Europeans. Your problem is that you are so fixated on Islamic exceptionalism that you just can't accept that Europeans could manage Latin or Greek, and instead assume that they had to ask Muslims to translate for them...

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.

I dont know enough about that period to more than assume and nor do you.

I think every nation deserves to be proud of its scientific discoveries. I said that before and i end this useless debate with these words.

My point with the video was to show that the arabs who were desert dwellers and their only mastery was poetry became a civilisation and contributed to modern science (in the field of chemistry for exampe) because of their islamic faith.

I challenge people to give me examples of religious practices of other religions that lead to the development of science. Now this should be interesting!

A religion that is not against science but nourishes it...

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)

I dont know enough about that period to more than assume and nor do you.

Speak for yourself. Do not speak for me. I know plenty about the Renaissance and Restoration periods.

Quote:

I challenge people to give me examples of religious practices of other religions that lead to the development of science. Now this should be interesting!

How about the religions that produced all those original thinkers your desert-dwelling hero's copied?

Or how about Christianity that has produced so much science that your 'scientific' Islam has been reduced to a bunch of second and third rate countries? Here is a fact to put that in perspective: the USA alone has more universities than the whole of Islam.

Seriously... claiming Islam promotes science is a joke. I challenge you to show me one area of technology where Islam leads the world. In fact, show me one area of *anything* where Islam leads the world. Now this should be interesting!

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.

You are being euro centric here. According to you Muslims took their ideas from former civilisations while Europe's development of science had only minimal recourse to arabic knowledge ('minimal knowledge transfer').

The world is Euro Centric. And while the european civlisation has of course taken some knowledge and ideas from the East the major ones were from the great civlisations before Islam. Islam also has some achievments but not much of it was really grounbreaking. Of course one could argue that it's not entirely Islam's fault. It's been a while since I studied this but I remember some theories where one of the main factors citied as for why Islam is behind(except for the religion interfering with the economy) was that the Mongols basically razed some of the important centres of knowledge and propelled them almost back to the stone age.. Of course as I said it's been a wile since I studied this and I was never really interested in it so I could be wrong

Quote:

My point with the video was to show that the arabs who were desert dwellers and their only mastery was poetry became a civilisation and contributed to modern science (in the field of chemistry for exampe) because of their islamic faith.

You are wrong

Quote:

I challenge people to give me examples of religious practices of other religions that lead to the development of science. Now this should be interesting!

A religion that is not against science but nourishes it...

Sigh ...you are trying to simplify the issue. It's much more complicated then this and there are many factors to take into account. But if you want it simple. When religion is in command (in the islam/christian type) it ONLY nourishes what it finds useful for it's own goals(for example it could nourish architecture for it's temples, astronomy if the religion has to do with it and so on).

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views

Christianity has not nurished the development of science in Europe as far as i know. You could hae provided an example to undermine your statement. As for now i dont believe it.

I fairly doubt your expertise in this topic VoR. Its a known paradigma that there was a knowledge transfer from the East to the West. The West even forgot its own achivements and it was the Muslims who - enabled by a religion that promoted seeking knowledge - sought knowledge, compiled it and developed it further.

That the West has taken the leading role in science is not a problem to me - unlike of what you might believe of me. I see no problem with this because knowledge is good and beneficial. So if the West develops science to higher grounds. Its good. The way knowledge is used is another topic.

Let me compile the reasons of the Muslims to seek knowledge:

[29:20] Say: Travel through the earth and see how Allah originated creation; so will Allah produce the second creation (of the Afterlife): for Allah has power over all things.

[58:11] ...Allah will raise up to (suitable) ranks (and degrees) those of you who believe and who have been granted knowledge.

Knowledge is given preference by Allah. Religion, faith and knowlede are not seen as incompatible in Islam. 29:20 challenged humans to observe the material world and seek knowledge. DHoffryn, you say Islam would only seek the knowledge that benefits it (like Architecture, Astrology), well thats wrong. The whole material world is under scrutiny.

Pediactrics: Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-Razi "Educated in music, mathematics, philosophy, and metaphysics, he chose medicine as his professional field. As a physician, he was an early proponent of experimental medicine and has been described as the father of pediatrics."

Surgery: Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi "He is considered the greatest medieval surgeon to have appeared from the Islamic World, and has been described by some as the father of modern surgery."

Experimental physics: Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ḥasan ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen) "Alhazen's work on optics is credited with contributing a new emphasis on experiment. His influence on physical sciences in general, and on optics in particular, has been held in high esteem and, in fact, ushered in a new era in optical research, both in theory and practice" "This work (Book of Optics) enjoyed a great reputation during the Middle Ages".

Sociology, economics: Ibn Khaldun "viewed as one of the forerunners of modern historiography, sociology and economics (alongside the earlier Indian scholar Chanakya)"

The house of wisdom: "In the reign of al-Ma'mun, observatories were set up, and The House was an unrivalled center for the study of humanities and for Islamic science [...] the scholars accumulated a great collection of world knowledge, and built on it through their own discoveries." (who doesnt. It makes no sense to assume the Muslims did not build upon their collected knowledge. It makes no sense to write a dissertation of something known. You chose a question yet unanswered.)

Translation schools "As early as the end of the 10th century, European scholars travelled to Spain to study. Most notable among these was Gerbert of Aurillac (later Pope Sylvester II) who studied mathematics in the region of the Spanish March around Barcelona". The earliest European scholars went to Muslim Spain in order to learn. The basics of european knowledge were laid in the Muslim countries and the subsequent translation schools.

[Holy Qur'an (Surah Al-Furqan; the Criterion]
Blessed is He who sent down the criterion to His servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures (25:1)
But the misbelievers say: "Naught is this but a lie which he has forged [...] (25:4)

Christianity has not nurished the development of science in Europe as far as i know.

Then why is all the science coming from Christian countries?

Quote:

Its a known paradigma that there was a knowledge transfer from the East to the West.

It is a self-glorifying myth.

Quote:

Knowledge is given preference by Allah.

Then why does no science and no research come from Islam? Why does Islam contribute nothing to the worlds knowledge base?

You can blabber all you want, but the facts on the ground are that the developed countries, with wealth and educated populations, are almost exclusively Christian while the second and third rate countries with failed economies and uneducated populations are predominantly Islamic.

The facts on the ground prove you wrong.

Quote:

Here is a list of people considered father of a scientific field. Ill list the Muslims among them.

etc, etc, etc. That is about half of the list from your link. Notice how it is far more than your allegedly knowledge-loving Muslims? The score is Knowledge Loving Muslims - 4; Knowledge Hating Christians - 156.

More significantly, look at the ones with (founder) after their names. Founders are the ones who have sought out new knowledge and developed whole new areas of science. All but one is Christian, *and there is not a single Muslim amongst them*.

That is the reality, Armitage. Islam has contributed hardly anything to science, and nothing new.

Quote:

Translation schools "As early as the end of the 10th century, European scholars travelled to Spain to study. Most notable among these was Gerbert of Aurillac (later Pope Sylvester II) who studied mathematics in the region of the Spanish March around Barcelona". The earliest European scholars went to Muslim Spain in order to learn.

Let me add the bit you are hiding. "Most notable among these was Gerbert of Aurillac (later Pope Sylvester II) who studied mathematics in the region of the Spanish March around Barcelona. Translations, however, did not begin in Spain until after 1085 when Toledo was reconquered by Christians."

And more:

"Toledo, with a large population of Arabic speaking Christians (Mozarabs) had been an important center of learning since as early as the end of the 10th century

[...]

However translating efforts were not properly organized until Toledo was reconquered by the Christian forces in 1085."

Even translation schools where Christian...

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.